RAM KESHWAR CHOUDHARY Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants Ram Keshwar Chaudhary, Ram Sharam Chaudhary and Mahatam Chaudhary had preferred this appeal after they were convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Judge, West Champaran, Bettiah vide judgment dated 29.1.1996 and 30.1.1996 respectively in Sessions Trial No. 86 of 1994 whereby the appellants were directed to undergo R.I. for a period of 5 years under sec. 395 of the Indian penal Code.

(2.) According to the prosecution, the informant has given his fard beyan regarding dacoit in his house in the night of 30th July 1993. According to the informant he was sleeping along with his wife and other family members in the house. In the mid night some unusual sound was heard from the outside, then he wakeup and came out side the house. In the mean while some criminals entered into his house and committed dacoity. They were the local persons because they were using local language and aged about between 18-30 years. In course of dacoity goods worth Rs. 27,000/- were taken away. The informant identified the appellant no.3 in the moon light. On the basis of statement given by the informant the case was registered agasint Mahantam Chaudhary and unknown persons. In course of investigation name of other two appellants also appeared and charge sheet was submitted against them also. On 24.8.1993 the appellant no. 1 was put on T.I.P. in presence of the Judicial Magistrate in which he was identified by the informant. On 21.9.1993 appellant no.2 was put on T.I.P. and was identified by the informant as well as by the witness Santosh Barman. The T.I. P. charts were available on the record (Ext-2 & 2/a)/. After taking cognizance the case was committed to the Court of Sessions where the Charges were explained to the accused persons. They pleaded their innocence and preferred to face the trial.

(3.) In course of trial the prosecution examined 9 witnesses, they are Birendra Chaudhary PW 1, Niranjan Berman PW 2, Santosh Barman PW 3, Birendra Sarkar PW 4, Amer Kumar Sarkar the informant PW 5. Sri Bipin Bihari the Judicial Magistrate who has held the TIP as PW 6, and Sri Satendra Rajak, the Judicial Magistrate who also held the TIP of another accused as PW7, the Investigating Officer Sri Sidhnath Prasad as PW 8 and Shanti Rani the wife of the informant as PW 9. In course of trial three witnesses have not supported the prosecution case and they were declared hostile. Those are Birendra Chaudhary PW 1, Santosh Barman PW 3 and Birendra Sarkar PW 4. Some witnesses were formal witness they are PW 6, PW 7, PW 8 and PW 9 is the wife of the informant and PW 5 is the informant. The dacoity was committed in their house so they were the natural witness on the point of occurrence.